4.0 Article

Phylogeny and Morphological Variability of Trypanosomes from African Pelomedusid Turtles with Redescription of Trypanosoma mocambicum Pienaar, 1962

Journal

PROTIST
Volume 166, Issue 6, Pages 599-608

Publisher

ELSEVIER GMBH
DOI: 10.1016/j.protis.2015.10.002

Keywords

Trypanosoma; turtle; Pelusios; polymorphism; phylogeny; SSU rRNA gene

Categories

Funding

  1. project CEITEC Central European Institute of Technology from the European Regional Development Fund [CZ.1.05/1.1.00/02.0068]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Little is known about host specificity, genetic diversity and phylogenetic relationships of African turtle trypanosomes. Using PCR targeting the SSU rRNA gene, we detected trypanosomes in 24 of 134 (17.9%) wild caught African pelomedusid turtles: Pelusios upembae (n = 14), P. bechuanicus (n = 1), P. rhodesianus (n = 3) and P. subniger (n = 6). Mixed infection of Trypanosoma species was confirmed by PCR in three specimens of P. upembae, and in one specimen each of P. bechuanicus, P. rhodesianus, and P. subniger. Microscopic examination of stained blood smears revealed two distinct forms (broad and slender) of trypomastigotes. The broad form coincided in morphology with T. mocambicum Pienaar, 1962. Accordingly, we have designated this form as the neotype of T. mocambicum. In phylogenetic analysis of the SSU rRNA gene, all the new turtle trypanosome sequences grouped in a single clade within the strongly supported aquatic clade of Trypanosoma species. The turtle trypanosome clade was further subdivided into two subclades, which did not correlate with host turtle species or trypanosome morphology. This study provides the first sequence data of Trypanosoma species isolated from freshwater turtles from tropical Africa and extends knowledge on diversity of trypanosomes in the Afrotropical zoogeographical realm. (C) 2015 Elsevier GmbH. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.0
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available